Based on an article from Chennai Online

The Indian Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) detected more than 300 cases of violation of censor certificates in 2005.

This included 104 in Thiruvananthapuram, 100 in Bangalore, 45 in Chennai, 22 in Delhi, 20 in Kolkata, six in Hyderabad and five in Mumbai.

Even as the enforcement of the penal provisions of the Cinematograph Act, governing film censorship in India, lies with the state governments, private detective agencies have been roped for all the nine regions under CBFC. These snitches assist in checking violations by conducting raids in cinema theatre.

From Navhind Times

Members of the Bangladesh parliament have urged the government to introduce a tough censorship law with provisions for jailing and fining those responsible for producing and screening obscene movies.

Obscene films are being screened regularly as there is little scope for punishment in the existing law, said Ebadur Rahman Chowdhury, chairman of a 10-member parliamentary committee. Members of the parliamentary standing committee have expressed grave concern over obscenity and vulgarity shown in movies.

Earlier the Information Minister, M Shamsul Islam said the government would stop obscenity and nudity in films at any cost and would operate mobile courts, if necessary, to take action against the theatres and producers who screen these kinds of films.

The government recently drafted a bill proposing stringent punishment for the people involved in obscenity in movies, but we urge the government to make the law tougher, another parliament member told IANS.

The Censorship of Films (Amendment) Bill 2005 aims to get tough on a section of filmmakers who have introduced obscenity in their films to make more profits, he said. If it is enacted by parliament, any filmmakers proved guilty of using obscene shots in a movie will face up to three years in jail.

Based on an article from The New Nation

The producers and directors of films are now trying to counter the staid position taken by the Bangladesh Film Censor Board (BFCB) by moving the higher courts for stay orders against its decisions, informed sources say.

Some of them recently gave threats to the members of the Board compelling them to temporarily suspend censoring films in protest. But the producers and directors are trying to use stay orders of higher courts as shields to continue with content that the censors claim is obscene.

Members of the Censor Board in a resolution said that Sharif Uddin Khan Dipu gave them threats against cutting off sequences of his film Encounter. He also abused the members of the Board when they were coming out of the show that day.

Secretary of the Censor Board Jasim Uddin Ahmed filed a case with the Paltan Police Station in this regard.

A member of the Censor Board told The New Nation that a vested group was involved in a move to obstruct the board members’ activities as they were trying to stop supposed vulgarity in cinema. A section of filmmakers are exhibiting films in movie houses flouting Censor Board certification, he said.

The Information Ministry has initiated a move to amend the Film Censor Act 1963. It also proposes to update Censor Code, empower officers of the Censor Board and District Information officers to seize supposedly obscene films, appoint lawyers and increase financial support to the Board.

Vice Chairman of the Censor Board Abu Abdullah said: We lack lawyers to monitor and pursue cases filed by makers of obscene films. Now the Board secretary and I are attending courts to pursue the legal matter with the government pleaders and the Attorney general.

Based on an article from DNA India

It's official. On-screen kisses are no longer considered obscene.

Henceforth, the Central Board of Film Certification, better known as the censor board, will cast a more benign eye on passionate smooches in films, with policy makers deciding, "after careful consideration", that kissing is "admitted and permitted".

Information and Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi said as much while responding to a question by Marxist MP Minati Sen on obscenity in film and on television and the need to give more teeth to the Cable TV Act 1995.

Dasmunshi urged MPs to take a more liberal line on the subject. He said that while a regulatory mechanism is in place, self-regulation is the most effective means of dealing with the subject of obscenity.

Dasmunshi was categorical in his statement: I would like to inform members that kissing in films was earlier prohibited. But due to growing emergence of electronic media throughout the world, especially in the subcontinent, after careful consideration it has been admitted and permitted.

He said obscenity must be judged by the censors on the standards of the time. There is no statutory definition of obscenity or violence except in the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code. But so far as films are concerned, what actually is violence or what actually is obscenity is to be studied with careful understanding of art, philosophy, and that is being studied by the censor board, Dasmunshi said.

Based on an article from Scoop

The New Zealand nutters of the Society For Promotion Of Community Standards have been whinging at the censor for passing the internationally successful films of Irreversible and 9 Songs

From a Society For Promotion Of Community Standards press release:

The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) - notes in its Annual Report 2005, recently tabled in parliament, that the two films most complained about by members of the public over the last year, were 9 Songs and Irreversible. Both were films that the Society sought unsuccessfully to have banned or cut, by seeking reviews of the classifications by the Film and Literature Board of Review. In both cases the Board unanimously upheld the R18 classifications issued by the Classification Office. The OFLC Report 2005 states:

Most complaints about 9 Songs centred on the fact it contained explicit sex scenes and was to be shown at cinemas....9 Songs attracted the most inquiries and complaints of any individual publication in 2004/05.

The film that attracted the second largest number of inquiries and complaints was Irreversible.... Complainants generally argued that the film should have been banned.

The Society remains convinced that the film should have been banned. The OFLC, the Board and the Courts lacked the will to ban it. spokesman Mike Petrus said:

The widespread complaints over 9 Songs demonstrate that the Society is continuing to play an effective "watchdog" role in the field of film censorship. In its Annual Report 2005 the Chief Censor's Office brushes aside the public's expressed indignation over the sexually explicit content in the film by stating that in fact, any sexually explicit film classified R18 can be exhibited in a cinema. This illustrates how out of touch the Office is with mainstream New Zealanders who do not want such sexually explicit material in public cinemas.

The nutters are also doing their utmost to get Baise Moi banned too

It is a question that censors should never ask. "Do you follow our ratings?" The polite response would be "I certainly find them useful to determine suitable viewing for my children"...But it is absurd that parents should be expected to follow them to the letter. The New Zealanders stupidly asked this question and got the answer that is blatantly obvious..."no"

How on earth could you even consider suggesting that your working 16 year old just emerging from shagging their partner should be denied a viewing of an 18 rated Bruce Willis movie? A probable realistic rule of thumb is that all movies are overrated by one age category. 

From Stuff

Video game labelling should be simplified so people know what they are buying, the Consumers' Institute says.

Investigative writer Martin Craig said the range of different labels from New Zealand, Australia and other countries confused buyers, and the institute welcomed a review proposed by chief censor Bill Hastings.

In the 2005 annual report of the Office of Film and Literature Classification, tabled in Parliament yesterday, Hastings said that unlike films, computer games that were not restricted did not have to be rated or labelled in New Zealand.

As a result, about 90 per cent of the games that appeared in New Zealand carried an Australian classification label. Research by the office in 2005 found that only 56 per cent of teenagers surveyed understood the meaning of one of those labels.

Craig agreed with the need for change.  New Zealanders are already familiar with the labelling system used for videos and DVDs, and the proposed changes will bring video games into line," he said.

A report in the latest issue of Consumer magazine showed under age buyers had few problems getting R18 video games.

Retailers have a responsibility to ensure they are not selling restricted games to under-age customers. While ID is usually required to buy alcohol, the report strongly suggests that game retailers have a casual attitude to meeting their legal responsibilities, Craig said.

Hastings said when his office classified games that had not been restricted in Australia, it gave most of them a restricted classification. The decision to exempt unrestricted video games was made in 1993 and times had changed, Mr Hastings said. In 1993 when the law was passed, games were seen to have a limited appeal and small likelihood of causing harm. Games have become more realistic and hugely popular. Some are developed solely for an adult audience.

He said the Film and Literature Classification Office was alarmed at what appeared to be a rising number of children playing R18 games. A survey of 331 students aged 15 to 17 carried out by the Film and Literature Classification Office in April showed 62 per cent had played at least one of 26 games classified R18 or banned by the censor. Hastings said parents should have more education about the effects of violent games on young people. The content of these games is quite amazing. If parents actually sat down with their kids and watched the kids play the game –- which is illegal –- I think many eyes would be opened in terms of the levels of violence and the levels of realism.

From Scoop

The New Zealand nutters, the Society For The Promotion Of Community Standards have written to the  new Minister of Internal Affairs, Rick Barker, to replace all nine members of the appeals body, the Film & Literature Board of Review, including the Governor-General's husband Peter Cartwright. Mr Cartwright’s term of office, along with those of seven other board members, expired 15 months ago on 31 May 2004. Their re-appointment can only be made by his wife, Governor-General, Dame Sylvia Cartwright, on the recommendation of the Minister. The Society points out that in the case of the appointment or reappointment of husband Peter, this involves obvious conflict of interests on the part of his wife.

The nutters claim that Mr Cartwright, formerly Chair of the Indecent Publications Tribunal and Chair of the Broadcasting Standards Authority, has demonstrated a consistently liberal approach to the censorship of publications containing sexually explicit content and extreme violence. They cite examples of Baise-Moi, Visitor Q and Irreversible.

The Promotion Of Community Standards outlined their concerns in the letter as follows:

1. The Board has demonstrated an extremely liberal approach to censorship. Rather than acting as a vigilant and competent "gate-keeper," it has given its stamp of approval for the release of films, videos and DVDs for public adult cinema containing: extended, explicit and gratuitous depictions of brutal rape (mainstream release of Baise-Moi , Irreversible, Twenty-Nine Palms), necrophilia, graphic violence involving sexual mutilation (Visitor Q) and the degradation, demeaning and dehumanising of women (e.g. Sinners No Doctor) etc.

Hundreds of such explicit videos, DVDs and films depicting men ejaculating onto the faces of women, multiple penetration (anal and vaginal), oral sex, "anal mania", sadomasochism (S & M), incest, homosexual and lesbian sex, prostitution, young people masturbating, "how-to-do" drug-taking, obscene language etc. are approved every year by the Office of Film and Literature Classification headed by Chief Censor Bill Hastings. The Board gets to review only a tiny fraction of this toxic material approved by Hastings and his team. Publications are generally only referred to it following applications under the Act by concerned groups such as the Society (which has a public "watchdog role") or by film distributors seeking to get the film's rating downgraded for commercial reasons (so it can reach a wider audience). In the last 12 months since 1 October 2005, the Board has only issued ten decisions. The Society was the applicant for four of these publications (Irreversible, 9 Songs, Playboy: The Mansion and Visitor Q).

2. The Board has demonstrated its unwillingness to safeguard the interests of children and young persons accessing computer games that teach kids how to promote and succeed in the pornography trade (Playboy: The Mansion). It has demonstrated its incompetence by approving films for young people that teach them how to indulge in illicit drugs, indulge in promiscuous sex, carry out gang rape etc.

3. The Board members are not representative of mainstream New Zealanders, the majority of whom oppose the dissemination of "objectionable" content found in films like Baise-Moi which was banned in Australia. The Board decisions are almost always unanimous in support of a downgrading of a classification restriction (e.g. Closer) or more often unanimous in opposition to any tightening to the existing OFLC classification rating so that the public good can be safeguarded. The liberal "mindset" appears to be so dominant and entrenched in this Board that any dissent by a member reflecting a more conservative viewpoint is squashed.

4. A number of the important decisions issued by the Board president against granting relief to the Society, have been shown to be wrong in law when tested in the High Court (e.g. Irreversible and Ken Park). A number of the Board's decisions have been found to be wrong in law when tested in the High Court and Court of Appeal (e.g. Baise-Moi and Visitor Q). The Courts have strongly criticised the Board in a number of decisions that span four years of its deliberations.

...maybe

From India Times

Academician Nandini Sardesai, a new member on the Censor Board is hoping to change its conservative outlook. She has just been appointed member on the advisory panel of the Central Board of Film Certification for the Mumbai region.

Excited about her new role, she tells BT, "I'd like to bring in a breath of fresh air in the censor board."

It was rather unexpected, she says. I had met Sharmila Tagore, who is the Censor Board chief, a few months ago. I casually told her that there should be academicians on the Censor Board as well. I guess that's how it happened.

Sardesai's aware that there could be rather conservative views as well from other members on the panel. I might have to face conservative attitudes. I know I'll have to argue it out, battle it out and succeed. If I had to cut a scene I'd rather cut stereotypical scenes in TV serials where women are treated as doormats.

Her take on kissing scenes and exposing in films is also clear: If it fits in with the theme, is relevant to the situation, I would have no objection.

And what did she have to say about the censor board's image among filmmakers of being conservative and too interfering in creative process? That's the impression maybe because the Censor Board still has members who've been there for 20 years and not moved with the times. They have an outdated mindset. Hence the negative view.

Lastly, aren't her views a bit too liberal for the Censor Board? I should be very liberal. So, eventually, a middle path will emerge.

I couldn't really make head nor tale of this story but one has to wonder what exactly is meant by misbehaving

From New Nation

Members of the Bangladesh Film Censor Board yesterday decided to refrain from watching movies for certification for an indefinite period.

A resolution passed in the board meeting said that they took the decision as a film producer and director misbehaved with them in the premises of the Censor Board.

Secretary of the Censor Board Jasim Uddin Ahmed filed a case with the Paltan Police Station in this regard.

One film director Sharifuddin Khan Dipu, yesterday misbehaved with two members of the board during screening a movie Encounter. The film Censor Board has for the past few month but a brake on vulgar movies by asking for dropping obscene sequences or refusing censor certificate.

The Board members would not watch movies until the problem was responded or punishment was meted out to the offender, sources said.

A member of the Censor Board told The New Nation that a vested group involved in obstructing the board members’ activities as they were trying to stop vulgarity in cinemas.

From The Nation

Moviegoers under the age of 17 may find themselves disappointed when attending the 3rd World Film Festival of Bangkok. They will have to miss some violent and erotic films, because the festival, organised by The Nation, will publish ratings for every film and keep an eye out to ensure that under-aged viewers do not slip in.

Censorship of films (and other art) is controversial in Thailand, with critics charging the cuts negatively affect a film’s artistic value. Director Nonzee Nimibutr suffered from bad censorship on his Jandara, while Pen-ek Rattanarueng, whose Last Life in the Universe won an award at the Venice Film Festival, also suffered badly from censors’ heavy-handed cuts. On the other hand, many Hollywood films depicting violence are screened untouched.

Supposedly concerned with both artistic value and our youth, organisers this year are experimenting with a ratings system that provides guidelines about film content. Based on the US MPAA system, there are five ratings:

• G – General audience, suited to all ages.
• PG – Parental guidance suggested; some material may not be suitable for children.
• PG-13 – Parental guidance strongly cautioned; some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.
• R – Restricted, viewers under 17 years of age must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian.
• NC-17 – No one under 17 admitted.

We hope this system provokes Thai society into understanding its real value – that it can protect children from more than just pornography. Most Thais worry about porn but ignore violence. We let our children see violent movies like ‘Kill Bill’ or ‘City of God’ and movies with mature content dealing with religion, war and adultery, said Dusit Silakong, the event’s deputy director, who has been pushing this issue since last year.

To educate the public about censorship, the festival last year displayed information about ratings in other countries in front of the theatres. Postcards were provided for audiences to write down their opinions about film ratings in Thailand and rate the films they saw. They were sent to MPs, to support a bill introducing a film-ratings system. The issue has also been taken up at the communications faculties of Chulalongkorn, Thammasat, Bangkok and Rangsit universities.

In July, the Culture Ministry took over censorship of all video and audio products from the Royal Thai Police. Permanent Secretary Dhipavadee Meksawan said the ministry was managing the task “with honesty and transparency”, and all parties participated.

Officials would work on granting permission to businesses wanting to sell and rent tape cassettes and videos, as well as censoring content, said Dhipavadee. She added that censorship would be undertaken in a positive manner, taking into account social sensitivities and being open-minded, accurate, legal, honest and transparent with full participation of related parties. “This is a new approach for censorship officials.”

Some cultural experts are monitoring developments, because they are worried about how the ministry will give “freedom of expression” to film directors. After two months, the ministry has not approved a single film for release. At present, many filmmakers cannot do much. The authorities seem to disapprove of Thai movies that mention corrupt government officials, prostitutes and drug dealers, said Dusit.

He said censorship might be needed in some cases, such as with movies dealing with religious conflict or the monarchy, but in general a film-rating system was needed. We don’t know whether the American system is best suited to Thai society. But if we don’t try, we’ll never know, he added.

The feedback from the festival may at least provide some sort of direction. The ministry and the local film industry should each keep an eye on the issue.

From The Nation

Film fans may have noticed that not a single new movie has been released on DVD or VCD over the past two weeks.

Following setbacks due to the transfer of the task of censorship from the Culture Ministry to the Royal Thai Police, more than a hundred home entertainment movies are waiting to be censored, resulting in the lack of new releases on the market.

The delays have led to complaints from the body of movie production companies known as The Thai Motion Picture Industry Association (THAMPA), who say that the setbacks are having a devastating effect on the home entertainment business which THAMPA president Worachart Rodthanom reported is worth Bt10 billion per year.

With more than 300 movies released each month, it usually takes just three days for the censorship board at the Interior Ministry’s Royal Thai Police to censor and give authorisation to distributors to release movies onto the market.

However, it has been two weeks since the shift and not a single movie has passed the new censorship team.

Following discussions among its members, THAMPA will today submit a letter to Interior Minister, ACM Kongsak Wantana, to ask the ministry to take on the censorship work again for at least six months to a year to restore the flow of business. It will also suggest the Culture Ministry’s Culture Watch group, who is responsible for the censorship, take guidance from the Royal Thai Police to enable them to work faster.

Worachart added the delay has caused estimated damage to the industry worth Bt100 million during the past two weeks.

Worachart said the hold-up at the Culture Ministry is being caused by the complicated censorship process. He said censorship teams at the Royal Thai Police were able to authorise the home entertainment products for release onto the market immediately and that there was more than one team. However, he said the Culture Watch group is just one team and has to go through three processes before handing the censored products to Ladda Tangsupachai, Culture Watch director and the sole authority who has the last word on censorship.

We’re really suffering, said Kitti Pakdevijit, a telemovie director. When one movie can’t sell, we can’t move on to making a new one because we haven’t got the money. It’s a domino effect.

However, Culture Minister Uraiwan Thienthong, said the work was not being delayed as much as it appeared and that preparations had been underway since March this year and the facilities were already in place. He said the only problem was the censorship officers, mostly police officers, had failed to opt for transfers due to concerns about losing various benefits including their chances of promotion, if they were relocated.

Don’t assume the worst just yet, said Uraiwan. We just need time to adjust, this is new to all of us. She said she understood the delays were causing damage to the industry which is why she had split the working board into two groups and urged them to work faster.

Nobody is going to take seriously the arrogant views of someone who thinks they know better than you how to bring up children. Perhaps his views would be better heeded if he suggested advice rather than threat.

From Scoop

The New Zealnd Office of Film and Literature Classification and the Department of Internal Affairs have released a research report showing that the majority of teenagers surveyed had played computer games that cannot legally be supplied to them. The report, Underage Gaming Research, was released today and is based on a survey of 331 secondary school students aged 15 to 17.

The survey was designed and analysed by UMR Research Limited. The two agencies commissioned the report after receiving anecdotal evidence of underage gaming. While the results of the survey cannot be used to show what proportion of young people in the whole country have played restricted games, they indicate that underage access to these games is common.

The survey asked the participants whether or not they had played any of the 26 games listed in the questionnaire. Twenty-four of the games listed were R18 and are therefore illegal to supply to the subjects of the study.

Two of the games, Manhunt and Postal 2, were objectionable and therefore illegal for anyone to possess or supply. The study found that 62% of participants had played at least one restricted or banned game. The Grand Theft Auto series were the most popular games amongst those surveyed. A small number of subjects reported having played the two banned games Manhunt and Postal 2. In almost half of cases, the young people had bought the games themselves while, in a further third of cases, parents had bought them.

The results suggest that some parents and retailers are illegally supplying restricted games to underage players. Chief Censor Bill Hastings said the Classification Office doesn’t ban or restrict games lightly. We do it to protect the greater public good from injury caused by young people playing games developed for an adult audience.

Only about 10 per cent of all games on the market are restricted, meaning that there plenty of games available that are suitable for young people. I encourage parents to take an interest in their children’s game playing and to ensure that they only play games that are legally available to them.

Parents who allow their underage children to play restricted games are breaking the law and doing their children a disservice. Mr Hastings said. Department of Internal Affairs Deputy Secretary Andrew Secker said that the Department's focus is on the stores selling and hiring games. Censorship Inspectors carry out inspections at between 400 and 500 stores each year.

The industry has suggested that it would be helpful to have point of sale material from the Department about the law. We are producing that and providing it to stores free of charge,  Secker said. We have found that stores responded well when we raised any concerns after inspections.

We have not yet prosecuted any stores but that is an option if problems continue. The Department of Internal Affairs has prosecuted a New Zealander trying to distribute Manhunt in this country. The Manhunt prosecution seems to have greatly helped with compliance. Since that case, sellers contacted by the Department have cooperated very quickly.

Based on an article from the Financial Express

A bill arming the authorities concerned with sweeping powers to supposedly 'clean' the cultural arena by stopping the screening of pornographic and uncensored films and those laced with obscene scenes was placed in the Jatiya Sangsad Sunday.

Information Minister M Shamsul Islam introduced 'The Censorship of Films (Amendment) Bill 2005', saying that violators of the law shall be punished with imprisonment of one year to three years or with fines that may extend to Tk 10,000, or with both. And there may be a further fine that may come to Tk 5,000 for each day if the offence continued after the punitive measures once taken.

A provision of the bill says no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the government, the Film Censor Board, chairman, member or any other officer of the Board in respect of anything done or intended to be done in good faith under the proposed Act.

Another provision states that no courts shall grant an injunction or make any interim order in respect of any order passed by the Board without giving the Board an opportunity of being heard.

The bill was sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Ministry for further scrutiny, asking the watchdog to submit its vetting report within a month.

From News Today

The problem with censorship is that it is a question of being judgemental, something which can always be debated. Recently the Madras High Court ordered the revoking of the certification of actor-director S J Suryah's New released last year for alleged obscenity.

This has brought the spotlight on the Regional Censor Board in Chennai headed by Babu Rammasami who took charge of the post very recently.

In a chat with News Today, Rammasami shares his views on the controversy surrounding the Censor Board in the wake of the Suryah episode and also the moral responsibility of every film-maker in the industry.

Q: Do you think censorship is necessary for films today in a country like India?

A: Definitely. It is essential. We are a liberal country and there is freedom of expression for everyone as enshrined in the Constitution. Though majority of the film-makers are responsible, there are occasions when the sentiments of an individual or a group is hurt. In such cases, we the Censor Board have to act as watchdogs. In the name of creativity, one should churn out stuff that hurts the sentiments of others. In some western countries there is no censor board. There the trade bodies in the filmdom themselves act as watchdogs. They know their responsibility and act as a censor board themselves.

Q: In contrast to Tamil films, sex and violence are rampant in Hindi movies?

A: No doubt Bollywood churns out more number of high-budget movies with a liberal dose of sex and violence. However, those scenes are not imposed in the movie, rather it is part of the movie. In many Hindi movies, it comes as part of the movie, whereas here it is being imposed for commercial viability. Vulgarity is rampant even in comedy sequences here. There is lack of social etiquette. And, censorship has also got to take into the context and the cultural milieu.

Q: Don't you think small screen badly needs censorship?

A: Though a majority of television channels possess self-responsibility, a few certainly flout the rules. Only on such occasions one has to step in to put things in order. Though rule prevents screening of 'A' certificate films at prime time, several channels have screened them. We have taken note of such violations and lodged complaints with the authorities concerned.

Q: Comment on the recent controversy involving the Censor board and S J Suryah?

A: The issue is pending in court. We thought it was a novel story but gave a 'A' certification to it. However, the Madras High Court has ordered to revoke the certification. Meanwhile, the apex court has stayed the operation for now. Moreover compared to other regions, the awareness and feminist activism is very high here. They had staged protests against the movie. When he (Suryah) approached the board to add a sleazy number in the movie, we denied permission stating that it was obscene.

Q: What would you want to say to directors and producers?

A: Before making a film at a huge cost running to several crores, they should study guidelines issued by the Censor Board. If it is done then all troubles can be avoided. The Censor guidelines are available with all trade bodies and it should be made mandatory for the directors to study them. Ignorance is no way a bliss for film makers.

From The New Nation

Some 23 judges of the Judicial Service yesterday visited the Bangladesh Film Censor Board and exchanged views with the members of the Board.

The Judicial officials discussed with the Censor Board members about the activities of the Board, the existing cases filed against the Body, confiscation of films, giving of Censor certificate and its cancellation and Board's initiatives to prevent vulgarity in films.

Chairman of the Bangladesh Film Censor Board and Information Secretary Dr Muhammad Mahbubur Rahman said, All the citizens have some responsibilities to promote healthy cultural activities with a view to sustain the tradition and heritage of the nation.

The Chairman urged all to discharge their own duties from their individual positions to remove vulgarity from the films to save the young generation from moral degradation.

From Korea Herald

Sex and Lucia, a Spanish film directed by Julio Medem, which was released in Korea last Friday, is full of sexual description. In the sexually explicit movie, a naked man and woman embrace each other and immerse in the sea in their seductive encounter ensued by consecutive scenes of sex.

Moreover, the man's genitals are briefly shown through close-up shots. Despite such scenes, the movie does not seem offending because it, as a whole, depicts a winding, nostalgic journey of a Madrid waitress Lucia (Paz Vega) to reconcile unresolved feelings on the sudden death of her boyfriend.

In the United States, the original uncut version of this film has been initially rated as NC-17. With some modification, the rating has later been eased to R. The Korea Media Rating Board (KMRB) was as lenient as its U.S. counterpart in rating the movie, allowing viewers aged 18 and above to see its uncut version.

It's amazing to watch a movie like this here in Korea without any cut or modification. I couldn't imagine this a couple of years ago. I still remember social jitters raised by Lies by Jang Seon-woo and Too young to die by Park Jin-pyo, said Choi Hyun-sik, who watched  Sex and Lucia on its release.

The "lenient rating" of the movie appears to reflect the recent easing of the KMRB's guidelines for rating films.

When Intimacy, a French film directed by Patrice Chereau, was imported in 2003, it had been prohibited from being shown until some obscene cuts were completely modified, though the film was not as strong as Sex and Lucia. Even last year when Drowning by Numbers, a British movie directed by Peter Greenaway, was opened after sensitive parts of actors' body had been obscured with mosaic, the situation was not so different.

In June, however, The Mother, a British movie directed by Roger Michell which cinematized sexual relations between an old woman in her late 60s and a 40-something man, was allowed to be released with no-cut, no-modification. The movie has clearly shown a sketch drawn by the old heroine, in which sexual intercourse is described. Since the decision, Innocents - The dreamers by Bernardo Bertolucci, L'Ennui by Cedric Kahn and Eros by Michelangelo Antonioni have also been released in sequence in its uncut version.

The KMRB, established to assure the ethics and public spirit of the films, phonogram, video products and so forth, has reviewed both domestic and foreign films, and made recommendations for importing foreign films. While the organization has examined materials containing excessively violent or indecent description that is harmful to public morals, and that may derange the social order, it has been perceived as an outdated censoring organization due to its strict ratings and subsequent measures, and thus considered as a big brother of regulation for a long time.

Now, the Board is taking a step forward to set a new guideline for the two clashing values it pursues to be reconciled: social order and freedom of expression. As Lee points out, these two must exist jointly in harmony. In consideration of the fact that the classification of age rating is a system protecting our youth from harmful media, I think further discussion is required for the strict ratings on media targeted at youth. However, for adults, I would like to support the development of our media industry by guaranteeing full freedom of expression to people who openly and deliberately manufacture those media. I will do my best to protect our youth while still fully guaranteeing freedom of expression. For this, we will review it carefully and improve it towards a desirable direction.

From The Toronto Sun

As a protest against the U.S. film rating system, Atom Egoyan's Where The Truth Lies may be released "unrated" in America despite the risk of being banned in many theatre chains, producer Robert Lantos said yesterday.  It makes a statement that we are bailing out of the whole ratings system, as opposed to accepting this punitive rating, a bitter Lantos told the Sun from his Toronto office.

That decision came after Egoyan lost an appeal in Los Angeles of an NC-17 rating on his dramatic murder mystery by the MPAA The rating was imposed in August for the film's graphic sexuality, especially in scenes involving co-stars Kevin Bacon, Colin Firth and Rachel Blanchard. The same film, uncut, will be screened at the Toronto filmfest as a Gala on Tuesday.

It's absurd, Lantos said. People should be able to make their own decisions. It's not like it's compulsory viewing. No one has to go. We're talking about making it available. That's it.

An NC-17 rating dooms a film to a commercial purgatory in the U.S. because many theatres refuse to show it and many media outlets refuse to advertise it. The same thing may happen with an "unrated" film, but Lantos said he and ThinkFilm, the distributor, want to make their protest statement.

The bitter irony of the appeal process is that Egoyan, after trimming a few seconds out of several scenes, actually won the vote -- six to four -- but a two-thirds majority is required to overturn an earlier decision on appeal. So we are stuck with the NC-17, Lantos said. This is the end of the road with the MPAA.

The trims Egoyan had made will now be restored, Lantos said. They gave us a long litany of 'offensive' material. We reluctantly took out some things we thought we could live without -- a few seconds here and a few seconds there -- but that wasn't enough. So we'll put everything back in. The upside is that we'll just go out with the original film.

Lantos said U.S. censorship seems to mirror the political climate of the current administration and he considers it repressive. It is also perverse because you can brutally rape and torture and murder (in a movie) and not get an NC-17. That is the troubling part. It is amazing the difference today between the U.S. and Canada, and it wasn't always thus. In fact, we used to be more conservative 25 years ago. Boy, has the pendulum swung.

From India Times

Performing animals have found a friend in the Bombay high court.

A division bench of chief justice Dalveer Bhandari and justice D Y Chandrachud recently directed that producers of films and television advertisements cannot use animals or birds for shoots without registering them with the Animal Welfare Board of India.

The division bench ordered, The censor board shall in all cases where an animal has been used in the shooting of a film ask the film producer to produce a certificate from the Animal Welfare Board of India certifying that provisions of the Performing Animals (registration) rules have been complied with.

The ruling aims at ensuring observance of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and the requirements laid down in the Cinematograph (certification) Rules.

Such a certificate has to be filed before the film is certified for public screening. At present, the censor board simply seeks a declaration from the film producer that the animals were not treated cruelly during shooting.

From Express India

Adult Tamil movie New had a new lease of life with the Supreme Court on Monday staying the order of the Madras High Court, which had directed revocation of its Censor Board certificate on the ground it promoted vulgarity.

A Bench comprising Justice H.K. Sema and Justice B.N. Srikrishna, hearing a petition filed by the producer of the film, issued notice to Dravidar Kazhagam media secretary A. Arulmozhi, on whose petition the High Court had passed the order on August 5, 2005.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi contended the High Court wrongly felt that the movie would influence young minds despite the fact the film was given an ‘A’ certificate restricting its viewership to those over 18 years of age.

The High Court had directed the State Film Censor Board to revoke the certification of New holding that it had been filmed for the purpose of ‘arousing sensual feelings’ of its viewers, especially the young.

From Glamsham

Central Board of Film Certification chairperson Sharmila Tagore criticised the brouhaha over the film Mangal Pandey - The Rising that has been slapped with legal notices for distorting facts. It is only a film and a story told in a certain manner... it is not history, so why are people making so much out of it? I don't understand.

Her remarks came shortly after the Delhi High Court issued notices to Bollywood actor Aamir Khan, who played the title role in the film, actress Rani Mukherjee and five others on a suit seeking a stay on the screening of Mangal Pandey - The Rising.

The court asked them to respond by Sep 21 to the suit filed by Raghunath Pandey and Onkarnath Pandey, who claim that they are descendants of Mangal Pandey, the Indian sepoy widely believed to have triggered what is known as India's first war of independence in 1857.

Among other things, the suit alleged that the film had shown Mangal Pandey in a relationship with a nautch girl, which they said was "out of context" and "unhistorical".

They have pleaded for the offending portions to be deleted before the film is screened further.

Tagore said such debates were an attempt to breed sectarianism in a secular country like India. This will divide the country all the more. We have to be more proactive - it is unfortunate that a film that depicts the hero of the first war of independence should be dragged into so much controversy.

From New Kerala

The Tamil film New continues to be mired in problems over charges of obscenity that have caused a sensation in the Tamil film industry.

Actor-director S.J. Suryah and his film earned some respite from the Supreme Court that Tuesday stayed a Madras High Court order to revoke the censor board approval for the film.

But the outcome of the case is being eagerly awaited by an industry that has often toed the thin line between art and obscenity on celluloid.

Released in July 2004, the film was a hit with campus audiences of both sexes.

Women's groups here protested against the film and the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA) took the matter to the high court demanding that the Central Board of Film Certification clearance to the movie be revoked.

The high court agreed. On Aug 5, it directed the board to revoke certification for New after expressing concern over "vulgarity" in the film about an eight-year-old boy who in his dreams at night is transformed into a 28-year-old young man.

Suryah was arrested last week for misbehaving with a woman official of the censor board and released on bail. He was accused of throwing a mobile phone at Vanathy Srinivasan after she refused to allow an objectionable song in his film. Srinivasan lodged a police complaint and a court issued a non-bailable warrant against the director. Suryah has been asked by the court to appear before the police daily at 10 a.m. until the next hearing on Sep 6.

In the Supreme Court, the petitioners contended that the film was in the realm of fantasy and should not be construed as obscene.

The apex court, staying the high court order of Aug 5, said the board certification could not be revoked. At best, the high court could order deletion of certain objectionable portions, he said.

The next hearing on the case in the Supreme Court is set for Sep 5.

From The Guardian

A movie distributor is to take the rare step of appealing against an NC-17 rating for the forthcoming Kevin Bacon and Colin Firth film Where the Truth Lies. ThinkFilm plan to challenge the adult certification, which severely restricts potential audiences in the States.

The murder mystery features a menage á trois scene involving the two actors and Rachel Blanchard which has attracted the censors' ire but is said to be central to the film's plotline. I guess I'm naive. I really had no idea it would be a problem, said director Atom Egoyan. I just heard the deciding factor could be thrusting. Apparently, anything over three thrusts and you're in trouble. Well, nobody told me. I didn't even do covering shots, so there's nothing I can cut away to. This is what you get.

An NC-17 rating means no-one under 18 can legally see the film, and many mainstream cinemas refuse to screen movies with this certificate.

Visitor Q was awarded an uncut 18 video certificate by the BBFC  in 2004

From Scoop

Press release from the nutters of the Society for the Promotion of Community Values: Court of Appeal directs Board in Classification of Visitor Q

The Film and Literature Board of Review meets this afternoon in order to deliberate on the judgment of the Court of Appeal that set aside the Board’s earlier classification of the Japanese sex-violence film Visitor Q. The Court of Appeal granted the Society’s appeal against the decision of the High Court that had upheld the Board’s R18 classification. It remitted the matter of the classification of the film to the Board for reconsideration. As a consequence, Visitor Q does not currently have a classification and cannot be screened in New Zealand or distributed.

In 2002 the Society applied to the Board for a review of the classification of Visitor Q as it took strong exception to the R18 classification issued by the OFLC). The Society submitted that the film should be classified “objectionable” or be subject to cuts on the basis of its “objectionable” and highly offensive content including: gratuitous depictions of necrophilia, sexual activity involving human excrement, incest, rape, sexual violence, corpse mutilation for sexual gratification, extreme lactation, and graphic violence. It highlighted the degrading, demeaning and dehumanising of women in the film’s gratuitous and vile sexual content. The Board, while conceding that the film contained “graphic and disturbing content,” refused to alter the OFLC classification and considered that the film contained “merit” in that it was “an ambitious attempt to describe the disintegration of family”.

In 2002 the Society succeeded in getting the President of the Board to issue an interim restriction order against the film. Consequently it never screened in the Beck’s Incredible Film Festival in 2002 and has yet to screen in New Zealand.

The recent Court of Appeal decision (CA59/04) - Society For the Promotion of Community Standards Inc [Appellant] v Film and Literature Board of Review [Respondent] – highlighted legal errors in the Board’s classification that had been overlooked by. The Board’s decision was found to be legally “flawed” in its failure to address issues related to the protection of the “public good”. Its serious omissions led the Court of Appeal to state: Without reasons being given [by the Board for its decisions] for what we view as a critical finding of fact, we cannot assess whether the Board has properly construed its role…

The Society has written to the Minister of Internal Affairs, the Hon. George Hawkins, asking him to remove all the current Board members. This call has been made because of the Board’s decisions to release films like Visitor Q, Baise-Moi and Irreversible (all featuring “objectionable” content) into public cinemas for screening to those 18 years of age and older. The Society has also called for the replacement of the Chief Censor, Bill Hastings, and his deputy, Ms Nicolla McCully, on the same grounds.

From New Ind Press

Sharmila Tagore, chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), will hold discussions with officials of the southern region censor panel in Chennai, in the wake of the recent Madras High Court judgment on the Tamil film, New.

On August 5, the Madras High Court passed an order revoking the certification to the film New. This is the first time that a film is being banned from screening after a successful run.

The court’s observation, terming the SJ Surya film as ‘‘vulgar’’, has shaken officials in the censor board, who fear the imbroglio has shown them in poor light.

According to Babu Ramaswamy, CBFC (Chennai region), the panel members who viewed the film New in Chennai, refused to grant it a certification, prompting Surya to take the film to the Mumbai censor board. At that point of time, Bollywood, which was campaigning to do away with censorship per se, granted certification to his film immediately.

It is to avoid such ‘‘errors’’ in future that Sharmila Tagore is holding a consultative meeting with the officials. There is a feeling among a section of the censor officials that since Mumbai granted the certification, those members also need to be represented in the forthcoming meeting.

Meanwhile, the Tamil film industry is not showing any signs of being affected by the turn of events with regard to New. Many new films, which are either blatantly vulgar or violent, continue to pass by the censors.

From HindustanTimes

The game’s up for filmmakers who make changes in their films after getting the Censor Board’s certificate. Detectives will now watch every reel of released films to catch alterations, if any.

The I&B ministry has decided to bring in a policy for hiring private detectives to check violations of the Indian Cinematograph Act 1952 once films get their certificates from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). Their primary job will be to check interpolations in movies that have been cleared by CBFC, a senior official said.

According to the Act, once the certification is issued, no change can be made in a film without the CBFC's approval. There can't be any insertion even if it is permissible in the Cinematograph Act, the official said. But violations are rampant as the government has no mechanism to check it. Primarily, it is the job of the district administration to keep a check. But they are not technically equipped.

So, the ministry hired private detectives to check violations as a pilot project. And it worked. According to officials, 85 ‘cheating’ cases were detected last year. In some cases, it was found that scenes that should have been deleted on the directions of the Board were being shown, an official said.

The success of the pilot project prompted the ministry to make it permanent. A proposal to engage private detectives is underway in all nine regions, the ministry's annual report says.

From New Kerala

Madras High Court today ordered the revocation of the Censor Certificate issued by the Censor Board to the Tamil film New, produced by S J Surya, on grounds of vulgarity.

A division bench comprising Justice M Karpaga Vinayagam and Justice S Ashok Kumar, also directed the Commissioner of Police to ensure that the cases pertaining to two complaints against producer Surya were investigated and report filed immediately before the court.

The complaints related to attempting to assault and abuse of a woman member of the board, who objected to the certification, and another to screening of publicity materials not allowed by the board.

The bench also directed the Chief Secretary to ensure proper implementation of the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act and the Tamil Nadu (Compulsory Censorship of Film Publicity Material) Act at least in future.

Wondering how the Censor Board certified the film New, which was full of dialogues with double entendre, obscene visuals and vulgarity, catering to the baser instincts of viewers, Ms Arulmozhi filed the petition, seeking to revoke the certificate given to it.

According to her, the theme of the picture was about a child of eight years being put to a scientific test, getting transformed into a youth of 28 years during the night and begetting a child. The board had sanctioned the public exhibition certificate unmindful of the supposed evil influence that it would have on young minds.

From India Daily

Janki Shah’s topless scene in Shaque is causing a stir in India

When she went topless, little did she or her producer Vinod Chhabra ever realized they were about make Bollywood a bonanza for topless scenes! The censor board is close to making a decision and it seems they will approve. If that happens, a series of topless scenes will become norms in Bollywood. She is ready to do more and so are others especially Indian expatriate models.

Based on an article from Stuff

It is customary in Egypt for films that portray sensitive political issues to be censored and/or banned from screening, and often the Egyptian Censorship Committee does not provide a clear justification for its decisions.

The latest film to be censored is Lailat Suqoot Baghdad (The Night of the Fall of Baghdad), which has been banned from screening.

The film’s production company announced that the film will not been screened due to technical problems, but sources claim that the Censorship Committee banned the film due to the precarious nature of the current political situation in the region.

Sources also claim that the American Embassy in Cairo had opposed some of the scenes, which feature the lead actor Hassan Hussni watching a television interview with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Later on his character goes to bed and dreams of making love to an African American woman.

A member of the Censorship Committee denied that the US Embassy was involved in the committee’s decision not to screen the film, and stressed that the Embassy had not even requested to watch the film:The film makers postponed its screening themselves due to minor alterations.

The plot of the film revolves around a school principal who watches the fall of Baghdad on television and afterwards begins to have nightmares that the same thing will happen to Egypt.

The film is the first this year to face problems with the Censorship Committee.

Based on an article from Stuff

Following revelations that a popular video game contains hidden sex scenes, the Chief Censor is reviewing its current R18 classification.

Chief Censor, the crazed Bill Hastings said the game, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, was classified R18 - the highest age restriction possible - in 2004.

The classification was given because of the game's depiction of crime and violence, but at the time, the sexual content was not known. The extra scenes can be activated by downloading additional software to unlock codes already existing in the game.

I have decided to use my power to call in the game for classification now that these hidden scenes have come to light he said. While it was possible the restriction would not change, censors needed to be sure the current classification was "still appropriate", Hastings said. The process is expected to take two weeks.

If the classification changes, distributors will be required to re-label the game. While the chief censor had occasionally reclassified films, this was the first time he had used his power to recall a game, he said.

Based on an article from IOL

Red-faced officials at the South African Film and Publication Board, who blundered by endorsing the release of a movie with under age participants, are desperately trying to recall copies of the film.

But their efforts come too late, as the film, ironically titled It's Just Wrong, has sold like "hot cakes" since its release in May.

An outraged senior board member said the blunder had caused huge embarrassment to his organisation. And the fact that we as the board, in conjunction with the department for home affairs, launched the 'Unite against Child Pornography' campaign in Port Elizabeth early last month, has made situation even more humiliating. It just goes to show that the board does not exercise due diligence, he said on condition of anonymity.

He lambasted the three examiners who passed the movie in the first place and called for stricter criteria in selecting future examiners. The board stopped the further sale and distribution of the movie in June after receiving numerous complaints from the public.

An independent review panel, chaired by Durban academic Karthy Govender, was then asked to rule on whether or not the movie constituted child pornography. Govender said the review panel spent last weekend deliberating over the movie before ruling on Monday, without elaborating, that it was a child pornography film. But this ruling has come too late, the board official said.

I have heard the movie sold like hot cakes from the day it was released. So there are plenty of copies out there that can be pirated and sold on the black market. I just can't understand why the board allowed inexperienced examiners to pass the movie in the first place, he said, claiming he was away when the board endorsed the film's release.

According to the Child Care Act, child pornography is the depiction of any image of any person under the age of 18, or who is depicted or appears to be under 18, engaged in sexual conduct.

When classifying a movie the board is required by law to report child pornography to the police. But for some strange reason this movie, which also clearly depicts young girls on its DVD cover, was classified and passed, the board member said. If the name of the film and the picture of the girls on the cover was not enough to raise doubts, then the movie itself left no doubt that underage girls starred in it. One can see from their appearance, mannerisms and even dialogue that they are young girls. I just feel that the board made a boo-boo by passing this film and am not surprised by the review panel's ruling.

This is the first time we have had to recall a film but it should not have gone this far in the first place. One of the core functions of the board is to protect children but it failed to do so in this instance. The board seems to be getting slack because we never had a problem like this before, he said.

...And I am sure the crime rate will dramatically tumble once restrictions are imposed

From Stuff

New Zealand's censorship office has written to the country's internet cafes, hire shops and games retailers warning them not to supply under-age children with restricted video games. The Film and Literature Classification Office issued the warning last month, cautioning them that penalties for supplying minors with restricted games include fines and imprisonment.

It's the first such letter the office has sent. While the agency says it doesn't know the extent of any problems, acting information manager Deborah Gordon says it has received "quite a lot of complaints from parents".

A recent study by research firm UMR found 62 per cent of 330 teenagers claimed to have played at least one game they were too young to buy or rent. Seven per cent said they had played Manhunt, a game banned in New Zealand.

The Internal Affairs Department polices the rules laid out by the office, and carries out checks at about 500 retailers and hire shops to ensure classification stickers are properly displayed and that staff, particularly part-timers, are properly aware of the rules. The biggest issue is actually people over the restricted age buying them and supplying them to people under age, says department spokesman Vincent Cholewa. A lot of parents are not aware of the responsibility they have, and a lot aren't aware of the nature of the games.

Parents or older siblings supplied the restricted games to almost half of teenagers studied by UMR, and 75 per cent said their parents knew they were playing restricted games. If many parents sat down beside their kids and watched them play the games for half an hour they'd be horrified at what they saw, claims Cholewa. Parents who buy restricted games for their underaged children are technically breaking the law, though Cholewa says the department won't be prosecuting them.

Games have to be sent to the censor's office for classification only if they're "likely to be restricted" - that is, if they have violence or have been restricted in Britain or Australia. If a game was cleared by the Australian authorities, it doesn't need to be rated in New Zealand. Online games hosted on New Zealand-based websites must also be rated by the office, and if restricted shouldn't be played by minors.

The office has put age restrictions on 270 games and banned two, Manhunt and Postal 2. Most commonly games are restricted to players above 13, 16, or 18. Another "mature" rating recommends games for players over 16, but it is not a legal restriction.

From DW-World

Some German rappers have been making the headlines for their very politically incorrect lyrics. The government's media watchdog for youth has censored several CDs, sparking a debate on just how far censorship should go.

They sing about the ghettos of Berlin, about drugs, sex and violence. German rappers from the underground label Aggro Berlin like Sido or Bushido relay the realities of their neighborhoods.

But while their lyrics may simply be a mirror of their lives, the German government's Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons (BPjM) considers these songs a threat to young people. We placed two Aggro CDs on our index at the end of May and there are several more we are processing, Petra Meier, BPjM's deputy head, told DW-WORLD.

The "index" is a list of media considered harmful or dangerous to minors. This is the case if they tend to endanger their process of developing a socially responsible and self-reliant personality, BPjM stated. Once a CD is on the index, it can no longer be sold to minors. The majority of CDs we are examining contain music with right wing extremist lyrics, but we are increasingly dealing with German rap music, too.

The BPjM ruled that the indexed songs significantly harmed women's dignity and portrayed inhuman behavior. Indeed, the texts glorify sexual violence, drugs and the perverse degradation of women.

The lyrics by certain German rappers, in particular those from the Aggro label in Berlin, are becoming increasingly more pornographic, racist and glorified violence, Monika Griefahn, chairperson of the parliamentary committee on culture and the media, said in a statement earlier this month.

Griefahn said that radio stations and music television channels like Viva and MTV also had to better exercise their obligation of control. And in a typically shameful statement: Breaking taboos and portraying extremes are important stylistic devices of art, which rightly belong to the freedom of expression.... BUT the protection of youth and the right of personal honor required clear restrictions.

She added, this kind of rap also sheds a poor light on German music.

Despite official criticism, fans see Aggro rappers as the German answer to US star 50 cent and his consorts. According to the label, their bands are simply rapping about the social realities in the high-rise ghettos. Whether it's financial problems, club nights, idol worship or anal intercourse, Sido feeds from a tremendous diversity of topics," Aggro said on its Web site.

Roland Seim, a sociologist specializing in censorship, said that although prohibited things may not be particularly interesting, they become so through banning them.This is especially the case in many youth cultures, which are supposed to be shielded from all sorts of influences. Forbidden areas in particular appeal to them as minors, to find out something they're actually not supposed to.

 Palindromes Stays Adults Only

The film was passed uncut by the BBFC with a 15 certificate

From Refused Classification

A 3-member panel of the Australian Classification Review Board has determined, in a unanimous decision, that the film, Palindromes, directed by Todd Solondz, is correctly classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, “Abortion and paedophile themes.”

In the Classification Review Board’s opinion, Palindromes warrants an R 18+ classification because the sex scenes are high in impact, not because of their filmic treatment, but because they relate to under age and paedophile sex.

The 13 year-old character, Aviva, is depicted having sex with teenage boys and an adult male, Classification Board Convenor, Maureen Shelley said. These scenes are seen to normalize under-age sex, including that of adults with minors, contrary to community concerns about these matters.

R 18+ is a restricted classification. Persons aged under 18 years cannot be admitted to films classified R 18+.

 Australian Censor Decision is Tat

The film was passed uncut by the BBFC with a 15 certificate

From Refused Classification

The R18+ rating awarded to Palindromes on May 26th 2005 is being appealed. Madman Entertainment were the company that initially had the film classified.

The Classification Review Board has received an application to review the classification for the film, Palindromes, directed by Todd Solondz. Palindromes was classified R18+ with the consumer advice, “Adult themes”, by the Classification Board on 6 June 2005.

The Classification Review Board will meet on Wednesday 22 June 2005 to consider the application. The Classification Review Board’s decision and reasons for its decision will appear on the OFLC website once the review has been finalised.

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. The Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

 Censorship Under Wraps

From The Taipei Times

Two weeks before the Measure Governing the Rating Systems of Publications and Pre-recorded Video Programs goes into effect, censorship opponents yesterday reiterated their opposition to the regulation. They called on the Government Information Office (GIO) to establish a review system and communicate with publishers and civil groups if it insists on enforcing the regulation.

The GIO promised to hold public hearings to discuss the issue with publishers and other concerned people," said Wu Min-hsuan  spokesperson for the Coalition Against the Pseudo-Rating Regulation. However, it has never discussed the issue with us, Wu said.

In order to find better solutions to the issue before the regulation takes effect, the coalition and legislators held a public hearing on May 17, inviting publishers and human-rights groups to share their opinions. The hearing concluded that the GIO should establish a review committee made up of publishers, retailers, writers and childrens-rights advocates, to replace the present Publication Appraisal Foundation. The hearing also said that the GIO should conduct a thorough review of the current rating system -- and hold off implementing the new regulation until the review reaches a conclusion.

Chu Wei-cheng, a professor of English at National Taiwan University, said that since Taiwan is a democratic country, the government should not regulate or control the media and publications: The right to lead a review system or carry out regulations should be granted to civil groups. Besides, the rating regulation, which violates the public's freedom to read, is absurd and should be abolished.

According to the rating regulation, which was suppose to take effect on Dec. 1 last year, restricted publications must be sealed and carry a label on the cover reading R rated: Not available for those 18 or under. Violators face fines of between NT$100,000 (US$3,184) and NT$500,000. Serious offenders can be forced to suspend publication for up to a year.

After a deluge of criticism from the publishing industry, which described the rating system as "harsh" and "vaguely defined," the GIO suspended the issuance of fines for violations until July 1. It also reversed its earlier decision that "R"-rated books would be banned from exhibition. However, labels and seals are still required for those books.

 Smoking the Peace Pipe

From The Indian Express

The Information and Broadcasting Ministry today endorsed Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss’s call for a ban on smoking on screen but got him to agree to exempt films already made or those that dealt with social messages on smoking. The ban will be effective from October 2 — to coincide with Mahatma Gandhi’s birth anniversary — after amendments to the Rules under Tobacco Control Act, 2003 are carried out.

At a meeting that lasted for over an hour, I&B Minister Jaipal Reddy supported Ramadoss but managed to convince him against running scrolls cautioning against smoking in old films and live sporting events on TV that endorse tobacco products. The minister said that barring such exceptions, no scenes of smoking will be allowed in films made after October 2. The Censor Board will have to follow the rules.

Reddy said the need to de-glamorise and discourage smoking on screen could not be disputed. His ministry had dashed off a letter to the health ministry on June 9, pointing out technical difficulties in implementing the ban. These included running scrolls on old celluloid films, period films showing the lifestyle of nawabs using a hookah or characterisations of historical personalities, such as Winston Churchill. The letter had also said that it would be impossible implement masking of brand names on sports events shown live. The Health Ministry has agreed to these points. In such cases, an inter-ministerial committee, comprising health and I&B ministries, will look into the merits of such films on a case-to-case basis, Reddy pointed out.

In fact, to make foreign channels beaming their content within the country to follow the ban, Reddy said a downlinking policy framework was being readied. The guidelines will require these channels to set up registered offices in the country and follow the laws of the land.

Justifying the ban, Reddy said, there was always a ban on smoking on screen, I am only tightening the rules.

Based on an article from The New Nation

The Bangladesh Government has decided to file criminal cases against the producers, directors and artistes involved in the making of obscene films, it is learnt. Bangladesh Film Censor Board has written to the Ministry of Information for filing cases against filmmakers.

A meeting in this regard was held recently between the Information Minister M Shamsul Islam and Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Barrister Moudud Ahmed, sources said.

The Censor Board could not take legal actions against the so-called obscene filmmakers, as it has no panel lawyers.
If the Censor Board files any complaint against any film, it undergoes a long process—from the Information Ministry’s legal Advisor –Law Ministry’s solicitor—to Attorney General office and than move to High Court.

To finalise proceedings against supposedly obscene films, it takes a minimum of six months, as a result obscene filmmakers take the advantage of stay orders from the courts to screen their films in movie houses. A section of filmmakers are exhibiting racy films in movie houses flouting Censor Board certification.

Information Ministry has proposed to the Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Ministry for amendment to the existing Film Censor Act 1963. It also proposed to modernise Censor Act Code, to empower officers of the Censor Board and District Information officers to seize obscene films, appoint lawyers and increase financial support to the Board.

From Backstage.com

In what Australia's censorship agency the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) claims to be a world first, films, videos and computer games marketed and sold in Australia will now carry the same classification markings, the agency announced Monday.

The new system comes after years of discussion about how to deal with the different demands that new media options present to consumers. The new system, sanctioned through legislation by federal and state governments, replaces two codes previously applied separately to games, films and videos. The OFLC said the failure of a classification system for computer games introduced in 1994, which did not make an impact on consumers, had in part prompted the change. The gaming industry has long been lobbying for a change to the classification system.

The new system will offer six color-coded classifications. Advisory categories are a green G symbol for general exhibition, a yellow PG for parental guidance, and a blue M for mature audiences. A red MA15+ indicates that a parent or guardian must accompany anyone below 15 years of age. Black labels for restricted, adult only material are differentiated as R18+ for "high impact" content and X18+ for material containing actual sex between consenting adults.

We live in an increasingly borderless world of entertainment, where the delivery technology is rapidly converging, OFLC director Des Clark told reporters. It makes sense that people should be able to use one system to become informed about classification of entertainment, particularly when the traditional ways in which we are used to receiving our entertainment are so rapidly changing and evolving.

Clark noted that four million households in Australia now have gaming consoles and said that the increasing convergence between the movie and gaming industries meant it made sense to apply the same standard across all media.

The move will primarily affect distributors and exhibitors but Clark insists there are no extra costs involved in the transition in terms of gaining classifications.

We need to be clear about classification across all media, said Richard Payten, joint general manager of film distributor the Becker/Dendy Group. Anything that gives a consistent message and takes away confusion can only be considered a good thing.

Despite the introduction of the new system, over-the-top violent or sexually explicit computer games are not going to find their way any easier onto Australian shelves. The government has elected to continue its policy of denying classification to games that would warrant adult-only classification, typically those featuring graphic sex and violence. As a result these games will remain unavailable -- at least legally -- to Australian consumers.

Attorney General Phillip Ruddock said at the news conference that the highest classification available to games would be the red MA15+. Ministers were not satisfied that if you brought those (X- and R-rated) games into the home that children could not access them, said Ruddock of the decision.

A spokeswoman for the OFLC said only four games had been denied classification over the last three years, including Narc and Man Hunt. The first and third of the Grand Theft Auto franchise also were deemed adult content until the developers modified them for the market, making them available in Australia with an MA15+ rating.

Clark added that the OFLC's overriding concern regarding computer games was to provide a safe world for our children. The new rules are effective immediately although they will be retrospective for recent releases.

From The Hindu

Indian Censor Board chief Sharmila Tagore on Friday came out against the way the government went about its decision to ban smoking in films, terming it as a decision taken in haste and very unaesthetic in taste.

No self-respecting Director will like it, Tagore told PTI, contending that the film industry or the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) should have been consulted on the matter.

Even as she supported the intent behind the decision, Tagore, who has shot off a letter to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry putting "her side of the story", said that the decision is "very difficult to implement" in its present form: Although I support the intent, it is very difficult to implement, especially when we have foreign movies also coming into the country.

She said that the government should give the industry more time on the matter: Applying it from August 1 is very difficult, especially for films which have been completed or on the verge of completion. Something like September or November would be practical to implement.

On May 31, the government announced its decision to ban screening of tobacco products in movies or tele-serials from August 1. The six provisions, introduced in the existing laws, require mandatory display or prominent scroll containing health warning when use of tobacco products is shown in all the movies or in tele-serials irrespective of the timeframe they were shot.

Commenting on the provision requiring mandatory display of prominent scroll containing health warning when use of tobacco products is shown, Tagore said it was very unaesthetic and no self-respecting director will like it. They are trying to make a work of art. This kind of a scroll is something disturbing.

She suggested alternative methods to highlight the issue. After the display of the Censor certification, the warning message can be displyed prominently and can be repeated after interval. Also, the film stars can make an appearance, saying they don't support smoking even though they have done so in the film.

She admitted that films had a big impression on young minds and that smoking was not the only way to build a character. However, she said that the method of implementation should be thrashed out after involving all the stakeholders, which includes film-makers.

From The Panthic Weekly

Open letter to Chair of the Indian Censor Board:

I write to you to express concern regarding the film, Jo Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal!. As you may be aware, Sikhs all over the country are agitated over the contents of the movie and the gross, negligent and deliberate misuse of the Sikh war cry and greeting, Jo Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal! .

A large number of Sikh organisations, from all over the world, have protested the contents of the movie as well as the use of the Sikh slogan as the title of the movie. The producers and directors of the movie have shown scant regard for the sentiments of the Sikh people.

The promos of the movie, as seen on many Satelllite TV channels do not leave much to the imagination of the film goer. Scantily clad actresses intermixed with the use of a Sikh slogan is just not acceptable. I do not need to point out to you what you and the members of the Censor Board have already seen.

We strongly believe that the Central Board of Film Certification has not applied its mind while certifying this movie. This movie violates the guidelines of the Censor Board as well as judgments of the Supreme Court of India.

The guidelines issued under Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 are very clear. This section says that a film shall not be certified for public exhibition, if, in the opinion of the authority competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the States, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or involves defamation or contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any offence.

I would like to inform you that this film will incite the Sikhs to react violently when the movie is released anywhere in India or anywhere in the world for that matter. The Sikhs may be small in numbers but they are a proud people and any interference or jugglery of their religious sentiments by any person, b